Araguz To The Supreme Court?
Texas widow "Nikki Araguz" must sit and wonder what a long strange trip it's been.
From the talk show circuit as a young transgendered woman to a marriage in Texas that ended tragically in her husband's death...she seems to be always on some sort of hot seat.
She lost her court case to claim death benefits in Texas and now is considering taking the case to the Supreme Court.
How does a person do this?
John Wright from the "dallasvoice.com" provided some insight.
"Nikki Araguz, who until now has been represented by Frye & Associations, said she expects Katine & Nechman will partner with national LGBT advocacy groups on the appeal.
Araguz said she chose to switch law firms because the high-profile case could have broad implications for transgender equality, possibly addressing fundamental legal questions about how gender is determined.
“I think that collaborating with multiple national organizations’ legal teams, and the Supreme Court experience of Mitchell Katine, is the better way to go for the greater good of everyone who’s going to be affected by the outcome of this case,” Araguz said this week in an interview with Dallas Voice."
From this statement I gather you go high power legal with backing from national groups and go to court.
On a purely personal level, I never forgot "Nikki's" appearance on Springer years ago explaining her oral sex act with a guy.
On the other hand I agree with her opinion all of this may have or could have far reaching considerations. Certainly governments have legislated gender. It's time for the highest court in the land to decide why they shouldn't.
She lost her court case to claim death benefits in Texas and now is considering taking the case to the Supreme Court.
How does a person do this?
John Wright from the "dallasvoice.com" provided some insight.
"Nikki Araguz, who until now has been represented by Frye & Associations, said she expects Katine & Nechman will partner with national LGBT advocacy groups on the appeal.
Araguz said she chose to switch law firms because the high-profile case could have broad implications for transgender equality, possibly addressing fundamental legal questions about how gender is determined.
“I think that collaborating with multiple national organizations’ legal teams, and the Supreme Court experience of Mitchell Katine, is the better way to go for the greater good of everyone who’s going to be affected by the outcome of this case,” Araguz said this week in an interview with Dallas Voice."
From this statement I gather you go high power legal with backing from national groups and go to court.
On a purely personal level, I never forgot "Nikki's" appearance on Springer years ago explaining her oral sex act with a guy.
On the other hand I agree with her opinion all of this may have or could have far reaching considerations. Certainly governments have legislated gender. It's time for the highest court in the land to decide why they shouldn't.
Comments